By Peter Andrews, Irish science journalist and writer based in London. He has a background in the life sciences, and graduated from the University of Glasgow with a degree in genetics

A publisher admitted it is urgently re-investigating research, following revelations that the PCR test it extols is defective, giving too many false-positives. The news comes as a new group plans a legal challenge over the checks.

Last week I reported on an astonishing review conducted by a group of senior scientists on a paper on which most Covid testing is based. It comprehensively debunked the science behind the Corman-Drosten paper, which described a protocol for using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique to detect Covid, finding 10 fatal flaws, including major failings in the operating procedure and potential conflicts of interest among its authors.

The team behind the review demanded that Eurosurveillance, the journal that published the original research, retract it at once, as in their view it clearly failed to meet proper standards. This is of vital importance because the Corman-Drosten paper laid the path for mass PCR testing as the main source of data on the coronavirus. Almost all case numbers, infection rates and even deaths attributed to Covid are based on PCR tests (and all the attendant lockdowns and restrictions on people), and a huge amount of them use the method set out in the Corman-Drosten paper.

But now, the organisation Retraction Watch have reported that Eurosurveillance is considering retracting the paper. In a statement, Eurosurveillance said that they were “seeking further expert advice and discussing the current correspondence in detail. We will, according to our existing procedures, evaluate the claims and make a decision as soon as we have investigated in full.’’ So no retraction yet, but it would not be surprising if one came soon.

Call up Guinness World Records

One of the 10 fatal flaws in the original Corman-Drosten paper was that it was unclear whether it had ever been subjected to proper peer review – before, that is, the panel of experts took it upon themselves to do so. The paper had been submitted on January 22 and published the very next day. Peer review, when it takes place, is normally a long, drawn out process with plenty of back-and-forth, even when it is being rushed as much as possible. That it could be done in a single day beggars belief.

But that is what the authors are asking us to believe, as they are still claiming that their article was “peer-reviewed by two experts on whose recommendation the decision to publish was made.’’ Eurosurveillance may want to consider submitting this feat to Guinness World Records as the fastest peer review of all time – it may not be too late to get into the 2021 edition.

Taking the government to court

It is clear that the wars over PCR tests are hotting up, and the stakes couldn’t be higher. A new organisation in the UK, calling itself PCR Claims, has been set up to challenge in the courts the British government’s handling of PCR testing for Covid-19.

The organisation describes itself as a pro bono network of lawyers, life scientists, and business advisers led by Jo Rogers, a lawyer who runs Navistar Legal.

Rogers told RT.com: “The intention is to expose the controversy of the inappropriate use of PCR in the context of pillar 2 community testing and private sector lighthouse labs.

“PCR was not designed for mass testing because of the sensitivity and risk of contamination. There are serious flaws in many of the protocols employed, which were hurriedly put together, some without peer review. The operational false positive rate is unknown and therefore every positive test could be false, unless accompanied by clinical examination.”

As an example of errors with PCR, the group points to a recent case from Cambridge University. “Our first priority is to gather evidence of the harms from restrictions to life whose policies were driven by PCR test modelling and/or ‘case’ results,” Rogers said. “We believe the cases are a pseudo epidemic, as seen in other places around the world using PCR testing.

“Legal action is progressing and further instances will follow as we receive the evidence of harms. The gathering of that evidence is ongoing nationwide, as well as our raising awareness of errors and negligence.”

As someone who shares their deep concerns over these PCR tests, this is good news. At last, there is somewhere to go for expert legal counsel on the government’s persecution of free-born citizens. And thank heavens also for the stellar work of the entire peer review team for holding this bad science to account. If indeed it is retracted, it will be a major victory for those of us who can see through what Dr Mike Yeadon, one of the paper’s debunkers, rightly calls a “false positive pseudo-epidemic.”

BY PUTSCH, DECEMBER 2, 2020. — Translated from French

Letter from Christian Perronne, head of the infectious and Tropical Diseases Department of the Garches Hospital (92) – France.

Dear Friends,

France, which has been living a nightmare for months, is waking up. In many cities of our beautiful country, the people are marching to regain their freedom, to demand the return of democracy. As a physician, a specialist in infectious diseases, and having served as president of many public health bodies or councils, including on vaccines, every day I measure the uncertainties generating the growing fear and dismay of our fellow citizens.

“I take the risk of being called a “conspiracy theorist” or better, “covidiot,” again, terms referring to those who criticize or challenge the Party line”

I take the risk of being called a “conspiracy theorist” or better, “covidiot,” again, terms referring to those who criticize or challenge the Party line. I’ve ended up being proud of these names, as my words expressing the truth have never changed since the outbreak began. I therefore consider it my responsibility to express myself again today on the entire medical aspect of Covid-19 and in particular on the subject of vaccination, now the central and almost the sole element of the state’s health policy.

Many French people have been mesmerized by the politics of fear. Since September 2020, we have been warned there would be a second terrible wave of the epidemic, worse than the first. The Minister of Health, Dr Olivier Véran, the president of the Scientific Council of the Elysée, Professor Jean François Delfraissy, the Director General of Health, Professor Jérôme Salomon, the Institut Pasteur, have all predicted catastrophic figures with an exponential increase in the number of deaths. Hospitals were bound to be overcrowded and overwhelmed.

Even the president of the Republic, during a recent televised address announcing the new lockdown, predicted no fewer than 400,000 deaths, adding to the 200,000 deaths estimated shortly before by Pr. Arnaud Fontanet de Pasteur. These unrealistic figures had only one purpose, to stoke the public’s fear in order to keep us confined, wisely masked. Yet the widespread use of masks in the general population has not been scientifically demonstrated to be of any value in curbing the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic. The people who should wear masks are those who are ill and the people who are close to them, in contact with them (especially if they are at risk themselves), and caregivers.

“Even the president of the Republic, during a recent televised address announcing the new lockdown, predicted no fewer than 400,000 deaths, adding to the 200,000 deaths estimated shortly before by Pr. Arnaud Fontanet de Pasteur. These unrealistic figures had only one purpose, to stoke the public’s fear in order to keep us confined, wisely masked.”

But the epidemic is waning and has not led to any apocalypse. For weeks, the shape of the curve has followed the typical profile of a seasonal epidemic rebound that is observed with certain viruses, once the real epidemic wave is over. This testifies to the adaptation of the virus to humans and it also reflects the collective immunity that is growing in the population and that protects us naturally.

The virus strains that are currently circulating have lost their virulence. The authorities cannot claim that this is thanks to the lockdown, because the downward trend had already begun, even before it was put in place. The epidemic had already begun to ebb in some towns before the curfew was even introduced.

Unfortunately, there are still deaths occuring among the very old, the very obese, or people with severe diabetes, severe high blood pressure, or already disabling cardiorespiratory or kidney diseases. These people who are at risk are readily identified. Health measures should therefore be aimed at protecting, screening and treating them as early as possible from the onset of symptoms, with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, whose efficacy and safety are widely confirmed when treatment is given early.

Many deaths could have been prevented. GPs and geriatricians have been discouraged from providing treatment. Considering this, continuing to persecute our children by making them wear masks is simply incomprehensible.

All these measures have been taken in oreder to make the French people demand a vaccine. But what is the benefit of a generalized vaccine for a disease whose mortality is close to 0.05%? None. This mass vaccination is useless. In addition, the risks of vaccination may be greater than the benefits.

The most worrisome thing is that many countries, including France, say they are ready to start vaccinating in the coming weeks, while these products have been developed and evaluated very hastily, and to date, no results have been published showing how effective – or dangerous – these vaccines are. We’ve only been shown the press releases from industrial manufacturers, who have seen their shares soar on the stock exchange.

“The first ‘vaccines’ we are being offered are not vaccines, but gene therapy products. We’re going to inject nucleic acids that will cause our own cells to make elements of the virus”

The worst thing is that the first “vaccines” we are being offered are not vaccines, but gene therapy products. We’re going to inject nucleic acids that will cause our own cells to make elements of the virus. We absolutely do not know the consequences of this injection, because it is a first in humans. What if the cells of some of the people who get “vaccinated” produce too many viral elements, causing uncontrollable reactions in our body ?

The first gene therapies will be RNA, but there are projects in the works using DNA. Normally, in our cells, the message is from DNA to RNA, but the reverse is possible under certain circumstances. Since the dawn of time our human cells have contained so-called “endogenous” retroviruses integrated into the DNA of our chromosomes. These “domesticated” retroviruses that inhabit us are usually harmless (unlike HIV, AIDS retroviruses for example), but they can produce an enzyme, reverse transcriptase, that is able to reverse transcribe RNA into DNA.

So an RNA that is foreign to our body and administered by injection could code for DNA that is just as foreign, which can then integrate into our chromosomes. There is a real risk of transforming our genes permanently. There is also the possibility, through the modification of the nucleic acids of our eggs or spermatozoa, to transmit these genetic modifications to our children. The people who promote these gene therapies, falsely called “vaccines,” are sorcerer’s apprentices and are treating the French (and more generally the citizens of the world) like guinea pigs.

“The people who promote these gene therapies, falsely called “vaccines,” are sorcerer’s apprentices and are treating the French (and more generally the citizens of the world) like guinea pigs”

We do not want to become transgenic GMOs (genetically modified organisms), like tomatoes or corn. A medical official at one of the pharmaceutical manufacturers said a few days ago that he hoped for an individual protective effect, but that one should not expect to see too much impact on the transmission of the virus, and therefore on the dynamics of the epidemic. This is a disguised admission that it is not a vaccine. This is a very serious matter.

I am all the more horrified, given that I have always been in favor of vaccines and I have chaired vaccine policy forums for years. Today we must say stop to this extremely disturbing plan. Louis Pasteur must be spinning in his grave.

Science, medical ethics and above all common sense must regain the upper hand.

Christian PERRONNE

via Zerohedge

Former Pfizer vice president and scientific director Dr. Michael Yeadon and German lung specialist and parliamentarian Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg have filed an urgent application with the European Medicine Agency calling for the immediate suspension of all SARS-CoV-2 vaccine studies – particularly the BioNtech/Pfizer study on BNT162b (EudraCT number 2020-002641-42).

Yeadon and Wodarg say the studies should be halted until a design study is available which addresses a host of serious safety concerns expressed by a growing body of renowned scientists who are skeptical of how quickly the vaccines are being developed, according to Germany’s 2020 News.

On the one hand, the petitioners demand that, due to the known lack of accuracy of the PCR test in a serious study, a so-called Sanger sequencing must be used. This is the only way to make reliable statements on the effectiveness of a vaccine against Covid-19. On the basis of the many different PCR tests of highly varying quality, neither the risk of disease nor a possible vaccine benefit can be determined with the necessary certainty, which is why testing the vaccine on humans is unethical per se. –2020 News

The pair also point to concerns raised in previous studies involving other coronaviruses – including (via 2020 News):

• The formation of so-called “non-neutralizing antibodies” can lead to an exaggerated immune reaction, especially when the test person is confronted with the real, “wild” virus after vaccination. This so-called antibody-dependent amplification, ADE, has long been known from experiments with corona vaccines in cats, for example. In the course of these studies all cats that initially tolerated the vaccination well died after catching the wild virus.

• The vaccinations are expected to produce antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. However, spike proteins also contain syncytin-homologous proteins, which are essential for the formation of the placenta in mammals such as humans. It must be absolutely ruled out that a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 could trigger an immune reaction against syncytin-1, as otherwise infertility of indefinite duration could result in vaccinated women.

• The mRNA vaccines from BioNTech/Pfizer contain polyethylene glycol (PEG). 70% of people develop antibodies against this substance – this means that many people can develop allergic, potentially fatal reactions to the vaccination.

• The much too short duration of the study does not allow a realistic estimation of the late effects. As in the narcolepsy cases after the swine flu vaccination, millions of healthy people would be exposed to an unacceptable risk if an emergency approval were to be granted and the possibility of observing the late effects of the vaccination were to follow. Nevertheless, BioNTech/Pfizer apparently submitted an application for emergency approval on December 1, 2020.

Wodarg Yeadon EMA Petition Pfizer Trial FINAL 01DEC2020 en Unsigned With Exhibits by Zerohedge Janitor on Scribd

Dr. Yeadon made headlines last month when he said “There is no science to suggest a second wave should happen,” and that false positive results from inherently flawed COVID-19 tests are being used to ‘manufacture’ a second wave.

As Ralph Lopez write at HubPages, Yeadon warns that half or even “almost all” of tests for COVID are false positives. Dr. Yeadon also argues that the threshold for herd immunity may be much lower than previously thought, and may have been reached in many countries already.

In an interview last month (see below) Dr. Yeadon was asked:

“we are basing a government policy, an economic policy, a civil liberties policy, in terms of limiting people to six people in a meeting…all based on, what may well be, completely fake data on this coronavirus?”

Dr. Yeadon answered with a simple “yes.”

He then lamented the lives lost as a result of lockdown policies, and of the “savable” countless lives which will be further lost, from important surgeries and other healthcare deferred, should lockdowns be reimposed.

Watch the full discussion below:

“Powers to conduct vehicle checks were afforded to police officers by the Welsh Government, under regulation 33 of the Health Protection – Coronavirus Restrictions.”

by Peter Andrews